Steve Irwin faced down calls for his children to be removed from him. His crime was to be identified as a conservationist who endorsed Mr Howard's policies. So that when his first child was allowed to entertain a crowd in front of a croc, no one expressed the action as an issue, but when his second child did it, the upset ALP supporters found issue with it.
Those upset ALP supporters are still angry, and they have found something else to be upset about.
===
Another example of the hypocrisy of ALP 'justice' is the hounding of an actor who was on the Workchoices advert which endorsed the policy. He is being fined for failing to keep appropriate records for employing contractors. The actor who lied in support of the Union anti workchoices campaign will not face legal action.
Freedom can be viewed selectively by the naturally corrupt.
WorkChoices actor fined for employee rip-offs
ReplyDeleteBy John Masanauskas
AN actor who appeared in a Howard government WorkChoices ad has been fined $7500 for ripping off young employees.
Damien Richardson was also ordered to pay more than $14,000 to two youths employed in his painting business.
Mr Richardson played a beanie-wearing father in the ad campaign to promote the controversial IR reforms.
In the ad, he said: "I'm being told employers can rip off young kids."
This was followed by a Workplace Authority post-it note saying: "No They Can't!"
But the Howard government pulled the ad after it emerged the federal Workplace Ombudsman was investigating Mr Richardson for alleged breaches of IR law.
The ombudsman prosecuted Mr Richardson, claiming he owed Erin Gebert $12,238 and Phil Graham $1792 in wages.
He was also prosecuted for failing to keep job records, failing to issue pay slips and not paying special allowances.
Mr Richardson did not appear in the Melbourne Magistrates' Court yesterday, but a tape was played of his calls to an ombudsman inspector.
In one call, he said he wanted to prove Mr Gebert wrong because of the defamation he had suffered in media reports.
"It's a joke . . . he was only a labourer, a subcontractor," he told the inspector.
"This should be thrown in the rubbish bin but I'm prepared to go to court."
Magistrate Kate Hawkins said Mr Richardson had not filed a defence and had resisted ombudsman efforts to resolve the matter.
Irwin's Australia Zoo in trouble over koalas
ReplyDeleteBy Tuck Thompson
AUSTRALIA Zoo's wildlife hospital has broken the law by not releasing koalas within their prescribed habitats, potentially endangering the marsupials and other koala populations.
The Australian Wildlife Hospital is required to release recuperated koalas within 5km of where they were found but failed to do so on at least eight occasions last year, according to environmental officials.
A spokesman from the Environment Protection Association said it had met the hospital to discuss the breach and is "monitoring compliance".
"All organisations involved in koala rehabilitation, including Australian Wildlife Hospital at Australia Zoo, are required to comply with the requirement to be released to prescribed natural habitat," the spokesman said.
"To do otherwise without authorisation under the legislation is an offence."
Offenders face a maximum fine of $12,375 per breach under the nature conservation regulations.
The breaches are a further blow for the multimillion-dollar Sunshine Coast enterprise made famous by the late Crocodile Hunter Steve Irwin as it fights a lawsuit accusing it of reneging on $2.5 million in loans and as it deflects media speculation of an Irwin family rift.
An Australia Zoo spokeswoman issued a statement from AWH Director of Veterinary Services Dr Jon Hanger defending the zoo's actions.
"These koalas were rescued from busy roads, which are not safe areas to return wildlife or in the middle of urban developments," it said.
Australia Zoo did not say where the koalas were released or whether they were still alive.
Koala rescuers for the Pine Rivers Koala Care Association have refused to give the zoo koalas injured in the northwest Brisbane region because it noticed animals were not coming back.
"Moving koalas is contrary to law and contrary to good scientific evidence," association president David Horstman said. "To me this is a long time in coming. Something really needed to be done."
Koalas released outside their home range are at greater risk of disease or predators, and there have been cases of koalas dying trying to return to their home territory.
Wildlife Preservation Society spokesman Simon Baltais said: "Based on what we know, we don't translocate them.
"We know they have a social structure and when you move foreign animals into an area, other animals lose out and starve."
An official with the NSW-based Friends of Koalas said the organisation put injured animals back where they were found.
"That's true not just of koalas but other animals like possums, turtles or birds," she said.
"You'd try to put them back in a similar type kind of area."